60 posts tagged “film”

OK so Bright Star was in a win-win situation:
 
John Keats: check
Jane Campion: check
Ben Whishaw: check

The trailers were promising. Campion was going to have to do something pretty stupid for me not to like this film, for me not to love this film.

For those who don't know the story, it is told through the eyes of Fanny Brawne, the neighbour and object of romantic poet John Keats' affection and some would say muse. The two were unable to marry because Keats didn't have any money as his poetry was yet to gain mass market appeal and then his life was cut short by TB.

Keats wrote beautiful poetry and this is a beautiful film. The setting, showcasing the simple beauty of English nature is like a third character next to Brawne and Keats.

The script is kept simple almost with the attitude that less says more leaving Abbie Cornish who plays Brawne and Whishaw who plays Keats to showcase a more subtle side to their acting abilities.

There is one particular scene which cements Cornish as such a talent, I find it hard to believe that she could have produced such overwhelming emotion for more than one take. It is when Brawne finds out from Keats' friend Charles Brown that he has died in Rome, where he had traveled to for the good of his health to avoid the British winter.

The performance touches on such grief and heartbreak that it brings tears to my eyes just thinking about it. And it is up there with Juliet Stephenson in Truly Madly Deeply.

If I was to judge this film on tears alone, my tears that is, not the actors, it would get a very damp 10 out of 10 as blubbed the whole way through. And I wasn't the only one in the cinema.

Not that I particularly care but here are what some of the professionals thought:

Daily Telegraph "It’s by some measure the best film she’s ever made. It feels special without being at all precious. Eloquent, too, but not self-consciously lyrical or florid."

Time Out "A combination of unstuffy dialogue, wise casting, unselfconscious performances and sensuous but never pretty photography makes Campion’s version of the nineteenth century feel current but not anachronistic."

Was catching up with the Radio 4 film programme podcasts which, incidentally, are very good if you are interested in non-mainstream film, and there was an interview with first time director Peter Strickland who made the film Katalin Varga.
It's been on the fringes of my films-to-see radar but I confess not a priority until listening to the interview. What intrigued me is the fact that it is a first film, made on a tiny budget in Romanian and Hungarian.
Strickland inherited £40,000 from a relative and rather than do something sensible like buy a house decided to realise a dream and make a film. But not only did he make the film, a challenge in itself, but he chose to make it in Romania and in languages he doesn't speak. As he found out Romanian and Hungarian are not very commercial languages to shoot a film in and once it was finished he really struggled to get someone to show it. He even starting thinking 'oh well at least I got to learn a bit of Romanian'.
It was eventually picked up and showcased at this year's Berlin film festival and has made it to the Curzon in London.
I confess I find the story of how it was made fascinating and want to go and see it this weekend. A colleague saw it at the weekend and really enjoyed it (and she was sat behind Ben Whishaw, can you believe that).
It's interesting that it is potentially the second shoe-string budget film I've seen in month that has actually been very good (Le Donk and Scor-Zay-Zee being the other) and proves that you don't necessarily need millions to make good movies.

Saw this film this afternoon. It was made on a shoestring budget of just £48,000 and shot in five days. It's a mockumentary-style feature about five days in the life of Le Donk, a washed up roadie who has 'discovered' a young rapper Scor-Zay-Zee.
The only other thing you need to know is that the Arctic Monkeys are in it. Briefly.
It's 71 mins long, entertaining and laugh out loud funny. Oh and I love Paddy Considine. No I do, really I do.

Now this I am intrigued to see when it comes out next year.

I'm also intrigued why they flash up 'From Christopher Nolan' then almost as an afterthought: 'The director of Dark Knight'. It's as if a film geek is sitting next to you whispering: 'He's the director of Dark Knight, you know the one with Heath Ledger as The Joker and the cool motorbike'. If they are worried that people won't know who Chris Nolan is why not just flash up 'From the the director of Dark Knight'?

Then there is Leonardo DiCaprio's diet. According to this story and others circulating on the web he needs to look emaciated at the end of the film and has embarked on a weight loss program. I'm all for actors of his pay packet suffering for his art. Make 'em earn every penny I say.

What is it with film companies these days that don't like people embedding their trailers from YouTube? Surely it can only benefit the promotion of a film by having the trailer seen by more people.
Anyway with that little grumble out of the way you now know why I can't illustrate this post because I can't embed the trailer so I'll have to make do with an image instead and linking to YouTube.
My dilemma is this: When I first saw a trailer for Tarantino's Inglourious Basterds I wasn't particularly impressed. It made me feel a bit uncomfortable watching such a frivolous take on a such a tragic and serious period of history. And no one is more surprised than me that it should sit so uncomfortably because I'm normally all for piss-takes.
But now it is out I'm torn. It's got Brad Pitt in it which means eye candy if nothing else, although I'm not digging the tash he sports.
I would have said that the fact that it is a Tarantino directed film is a draw but actually when I think about it, I've only seen Pulp Fiction, Reservoir Dogs and Jackie Brown. I think the violence in the Kill Bill's put me off, although I will watch it at home at some point, and Death Proof and it's predecessor I can't even recall the name of just looked awfully gratuitous.
So shall I go and watch Inglorious Basterds?

I hate it when films are described as the 'new' something because it invariably means they are a poor imitation and, well, lack the originality of the first for which they were so charming or memorable.
But the trailer for Sin Nombre, described as the 'new City of God' on some posters, looked really promising and without reading anything else I decided to give it a go.
And I am so glad I did. It is certainly a contender for one of the films in my top five this year (and I see a lot of films).
Sin Nombre is set primarily in Mexico and tells the story of Willy, a gang member on the run, who meets Sayra who is travelling from Honduras with her family to attempt to cross the border with the US and start a new life.
It is at times brutal and touching. Edgar Flores plays Willy and from what I glean on the internet is a relative new-comer to the world of acting but nonetheless puts in a startlingly emotional performance. He has such an expressive face that it gives him an incredible screen presence.
There is also a beauty to the gritty realism which isn't really suprising as this is the diretorial debut of Cary Fukunaga who was a cinematographer. He also wrote the film.
It has a couple of hand over mouth incidents but not where you would expect. City of God shocked, this does too but in a different way.
It is really good, go and see it.
I can't find an embedable version of the trailer without the annoying American voice over* but if you click here it's on the Empire website.

What the professionals say:
The Times "To say that this brutal, brilliant film about Central American migrants travelling through Mexico doesn’t pull its punches is an understatement."
NY Times "The caressing, honeyed light in “Sin Nombre” beautifies and softens every ugly moment in this equivocating (inspirational yet hard-boiled) story about geographic and moral border crossings."
Empire "Captivatingly naturalistic performances and cinematography almost makes up for the lack of a larger political framework."

* It just completely ruins it with that stereotypical trailer voice-over that booms something akin to: "He was on the run... she was looking for a new life". I think the simpler European trailer is far more evocative.

OMG how sexy is Johnny Depp in this film.
*sighs dreamily*
*Stares dreamily into the distance*
Oh the rest of the film? Well if you don't know the story it's about notorious depression era gangster John Dillinger played by Depp and the cop who eventually brings him down who is played by Christian Bale. The wonderful Marion Cotillard plays Depp's lover Billie.
Only Dillingers character is really allowed room to breath and develop while Bale's cop is fairly one dimensional. I couldn't help thinking, although to a lesser degree, of Bale's Batman to Heath Ledger's Joker and wonder whether he has doomed himself to playing the serious, sensible and slightly boring characters.
As a result the showdown between cop and robber is a bit of a damp squib. I was rooting for Dillinger (I confess I didn't know the story so believed he might outwit the law one last time) and the end seemed almost tragically disappointing but then you can't change history (too much).
It did bring a tear to my eye but on the whole it felt like a trick had been missed, well two if you count Billie which is a very underused character. Cotillard has such a strong screen presence that I wanted more of her and her relationship with Dillinger.
There was nothing fundamentally wrong with the film but neither was it fundamentally right. Apart from Depp of course. *sigh*

This picture was taken last night at the BFI on the South Bank by photographer Ted Williams whom I came across on Twitter just now. Bernal's new film Rudo y Cursi is on my list for this weekends viewing. Trailer is below.

The last couple of weeks have been one of those rare occasions during the year when nothing at the cinema has grabbed me. But spurred on by Mark Kermode's enthusiastic words while on Five Live about this French film I decided to return to my usual Sunday afternoon haunt: The cinema.
Now as a rule I don't listen or read reviews before seeing a film but I didn't really know much about this and it was talked about amidst reviews for a bunch of films I had no intention of seeing. And I'm glad I listened because it is a neat and entertaining film.
The story is of a young family ripped apart when the wife and mother, Lisa - played wonderfully by Diane Kruger proving she's not just a pretty face - is arrested and convicted of murder. Her husband, school teacher Julien, (Vincent Lindon) unable to bear watching her grow suicidal in prison and with no legal means left to free her decides to take matters into his own hands and break her out.
The more he investigates this undertaking, the more impossible it appears and having risked everything, by the end of the film you are on the edge of your seat willing him overcome the terrible odds and succeed.
It definitely stands alongside Tell No One as great French cinema of recent years.
Other reviews:
Guardian
Telegraph
Time Out

I'd forgotten this was being made into a film. It is one of my favourite books so I really hope they haven't screwed it up. (I'm always nervous about adaptations of books I love after the disaster that was Captain Corelli's Mandolin) The trailer makes me hopeful though, roll on August 14.